Jun 12, 2017 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Speaking at the UN Human Rights Council, the ICJ today highlighted judicial corruption and threats to judges and lawyers in Turkey and Azerbaijan, as well as regressive steps on violence against women in the United States of America and Russian Federation.
The statement, delivered during the interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers and the UN Special Rapporteur on Violence against Women, was as follows:
“The ICJ warmly welcomes the new Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers. As he has highlighted, ensuring judges are accountable for corruption and human rights violations, while respecting judicial independence, should be a global priority. Our Practitioners’ Guide on Judicial Accountability, published last year, should be of particular use to the Rapporteur and other actors in this regard.
Several situations serve as stark examples of other issues raised in his report. In Turkey, recent constitutional amendments give the President and Parliament control over the judiciary’s governing body. This has undermined the judiciary’s independence, already threatened by the mass dismissal of judges and the state of emergency. Lawyers and legal scholars, among others, are routinely dismissed or threatened by the authorities.
In Azerbaijan, the Bar Association is not independent and does not protect its members against undue interference with the exercise of their professional duties. Rather, it often serves as a tool of retaliation against independent human rights lawyers, including through disbarment proceedings that contravene international standards.
We would ask the Special Rapporteur for his views on the role his mandate can play in these and similar situations.
The ICJ also welcomes the report of the Special Rapporteur on violence against women.
Despite increasing global acknowledgement of the grave and systemic nature of violence against women, some States continue to introduce regressive legislation undermining protections for women. For example, the Russian Federation’s decriminalization of certain forms of domestic violence, and attempts in some parts of the United States of America to restrict availability of sexual and reproductive healthcare, particularly impact on victims of sexual violence. The Philippines’ President’s public statements disregarding the gravity of sexual violence are another example. The ICJ would ask the Special Rapporteur what can be done to prevent such backsliding?”
Mar 27, 2017 | Multimedia items, News, Video clips
The ICJ continues its series of women’s rights defender profiles with an interview with Imrana Jalal, an ICJ Executive Committee member, focussing on her motivations for women’s rights work.
Dec 13, 2016 | News
The ICJ and Human Rights Commission of Pakistan (HRCP) urge the Pakistani authorities to fully engage with the UN human rights body by answering its questions comprehensively.
The call follows the recent adoption by the United Nations Human Rights Committee of a document raising a multiplicity of concerns about Pakistan’s human rights record.
“It is encouraging to see Pakistan’s increased engagement with United Nations human rights mechanisms in recent years”, said Sam Zarifi, ICJ’s Asia Director.
“But it is important that the Government does not stop here and now takes the additional constructive step of answering all the Committee’s questions truthfully and honestly,” he added.
In November 2016, during its 118th session, the Human Rights Committee adopted a document known as a List of issues in relation to Pakistan’s compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), in which the Committee asked multiple questions about the country’s human rights record, including:
- Fair trial concerns as a result of the expanded jurisdiction of military courts following the introduction/adoption of the 21st Amendment to the Constitution, including the criteria for and the process of selecting cases to be tried by military courts, the qualifications of judges presiding over those courts and their proceedings;
- Reintroduction of the death penalty and the wide scope of its application, including the mandatory death sentence for “blasphemy”;
- Broad and vaguely defined “blasphemy offences”, their disproportionate use against individuals belonging to religious minorities; the large number of “blasphemy” cases instituted on the basis of false accusations; and the lack of mechanisms to protect judges who hear “blasphemy” cases and those accused of blasphemy from intimidation and threats;
- Rights of Ahmadis, including their “right to profess, practice and propagate” their religion without interference;
- Repatriation of Afghan refugees, including information on the adoption of a draft national refugee law and a comprehensive policy on the voluntary repatriation and management of Afghan nationals;
- Rights of women, including steps taken by the Government to prevent and punish persistent violence (sexual and otherwise) against women, including so-called honour killings;
- Torture and other ill-treatment, extrajudicial killings, and enforced disappearances, including steps taken by the Government to implement the Supreme Court’s judgment in the Muhabbat Shah case, which held military authorities responsible for the enforced disappearance of at least 28 people from a Malakand internment centre.
This is the first time Pakistan’s human rights record is being reviewed by the Human Rights Committee, the treaty body that monitors implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights by its State parties, since Pakistan ratified the Covenant in 2010.
The next step in the review process is for Pakistan to respond to the questions framed in the List of Issues.
The Human Rights Committee will undertake a comprehensive review Pakistan’s compliance with and implementation of the ICCPR and adopt concluding observations in July 2017.
“It is of the utmost importance to Pakistan to derive greater benefit from its engagement with the UN human rights mechanisms by making a sincere effort to answer the concerns of the Committee,” said I A Rehman, Secretary General of HRCP.
Background
Pakistan ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in June 2010. Following ratification/accession, every state party to the ICCPR is required to submit an initial “state report” containing information on the implementation of each provision of the treaty.
Pakistan submitted its initial state report to the Human Rights Committee in October 2015.
In light of the information provided in the State report, as well as information received from civil society, the Human Rights Committee then prepares a List of Issues containing particular issues of concern to the Committee, and asking whatever questions it sees fit in light of those concerns.
The answers provided by the State party to those questions, as well as other information submitted by civil society and others form the basis of the “review” of the State’s compliance with the treaty.
The State is not obligated to reply to the List of Issues in advance of the review session, but in practice most do.
The State replies are presented to the Committee at the beginning of the review and are the starting point for the interactive dialogue between the Committee and the State under review.
During the review, the Committee meets with State representatives who present answers to the List of Issues and respond to the Committee’s questions.
At the end of the session, the Committee adopts Concluding Observations, which highlight the Committee’s concerns and make recommendations to the State on improving the implementation of the ICCPR.
Pakistan’s ICCPR review is scheduled to take place in July 2017.
Contact
Sam Zarifi, ICJ Asia Pacific Regional Director (Bangkok), t: +66 807819002; email: sam.zarifi(a)icj.org
Pakistan-list-of-issues-advocacy-2016-eng (in PDF)
Jun 9, 2016 | News
The ICJ welcomes the landmark decision issued today by the UN Human Rights Committee in the case of Amanda Mellet v. Ireland under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
The Committee found that, by forcing Amanda Mellet to choose either to carry her foetus to term, despite its fatal fœtal abnormality, or to travel abroad to seek an abortion, Ireland had subjected her to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and discrimination, in violation of its obligations under the Covenant.
The ICJ considers that in light of the Committee’s decision Ireland must provide reparation to Amanda Mellet and reform its laws to prevent future violations.
Otherwise, Ireland will be in breach of its legal obligation to provide Amanda Mellet with an effective remedy – including in the terms set out in the Committee’s decision – for the human rights violations she suffered.
Related readings:
Full text of Human Rights Committee’s decision (download in PDF)
Jul 31, 2015 | News
The ICJ held a colloquium on this issue on 30-31 July. Judges, magistrates, lawyers, members of academia, and civil society leaders from SADC, ECOWAS and the East African Community attended the event.
The Acting Chief Justice of the Kingdom of Swaziland, MCB Maphalala and the Secretary General of ICJ, Wilder Tayler, officially opened the colloquium.
The participants discussed the concept of gender-based violence; the efforts to combat impunity in sexual offences and gender based violence at the national, regional and international level and made recommendations to eliminate the scourge.
One of the key objectives of the workshop was to contribute to the process of enacting sexual offences and domestic violence legislation in Swaziland.
The Sexual Offences and Domestic Violence Bill of Swaziland is before the house of assembly, which has asked stakeholders to submit their views, on what should be included in the law.
The judges, lawyers and civil society leaders had robust and honest discussions touching on effective innovative strategies to combat sexual and gender based violence.
Some of the recommendations included the training of judicial officers to be gender sensitive, changing societal attitudes and prejudices, raising awareness amongst parliamentarians, creative interpretation and application of regional and international standards when adjudicating cases of sexual offences and gender based violence as well as observance of fair trial standards at the national, regional and international level.
The colloquium was made possible with funding from IrishAid.
